##PAGE1##

Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010120742017

undefined

THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

Case No. : WP(C)/267/2017

HELAL UDDIN S/O LT. MANASH ALI TEMPORARY ADDRESS- C/O MOHAMMED EKRAMOL OF VILL- NO.3 RAILWAY GATE, KUMARPATTY, P.S. GOLAGHAT, DIST.

GOLAGHAT, ASSAM PRESENT and PERMANENT ADDRESS- VILL-

BHERBHERI, P.S. BATADRAVA, DIST. NAGAON, ASSAM.

VERSUS

THE UNION OF INDIA and 5 ORS.

TO BE REP. BY SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA, HOME DEPARTMENT, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.

2:THE STATE OF ASSAM TO BE REP. BY COMMISSIONER and SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF ASSAM HOME DEPARTMENT

DISPUR GUWAHATI-06.

3:ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE ASSAM

BORDER BHANGAGARH

GUWAHATI-5.

4:DEPUTY COMMISSIONER

NAGAON ASSAM.

5:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BORDER

Page No.# 2/4

NAGAON ASSAM.

6:SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE BORDER

GOLAGHAT ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.K MIRA, MR.D K DEKA,MR.N H MAZARBHUYAN,MR.N ISLAM,MS.L WAJEEDA

Advocate for the Respondent : , ASSTT.S.G.I.,GA, ASSAM

BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI

HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHAMIMA JAHAN

ORDER

28.04.2026 (SK Medhi, J.

Heard Ms. L Wajeeda, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri J.

Payeng, learned Standing Counsel, N.R.C. & F.T.; Shri A.I. Ali, learned Standing Counsel, E.C.I. and Ms. R.B. Bora, learned State Counsel, Assam.

2. By means of this petition, the petitioner has put to challenge an order dated 03.11.2016 passed by the learned Foreigner’s Tribunal, Jorhat, Assam in Case No. F.T.G. 136/2014. By the aforesaid order, the petitioner has been declared to be a

foreigner of the stream between 01.01.1996 to 24.03.1971.

3. At the outset, the learned counsel has clarified that though the challenge was made against the aforesaid order dated 03.11.2016, the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued for registering his name in terms of Section 19 of the Citizenship

Rules, 2009.

Page No.# 3/4

4. At this stage, Shri Payeng, learned Standing Counsel has, however, placed before this Court the judgment dated 17.10.2024 of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of In Re: Section 6A of the Citizenship Act, 1955. He has submitted that though the vires of the said section has been upheld, the Minority Judgment authored by the Hon’ble Mr. Justice, J.B. Padriwala, while holding the same section to be invalid, has also made an observation in paragraph 218(d) that for immigrants who have migrated between 01.01.1966 to 24.03.1971 (both inclusive) and have been detected foreigners but have not registered themselves with the registering authority within the prescribed time limit as per the Citizenship Rule, 2009 will no longer be eligible for the benefit of citizenship. The learned Standing Counsel has also placed before this Court a judgment of a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Begum Zan Vs. Union of Inida & Ors., reported in 2025 (2) GLT 496. The aspect of registering is under Part IV of the Citizenship Rules, 2009 under the heading “Provisions as to Citizenship of India for Persons covered by Assam Accord”. Under Rule 19(2), including the proviso, the time granted for such registration is thirty days from the receipt of the order of the concerned F.T. As per the proviso, the period can be extended to further period but

not exceeding sixty days which has to be done by recording reasons.

5. In the instant case, the opinion is dated 03.11.2016 which was received on

18.11.2016. The writ petition was instituted on 11.01.2017.

6. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the observations made in paragraph 218(d) of the Minority judgment may not come into the way for consideration of the case of the petitioner for registration under Section

6A(3) on the ground of expiry of time.

7. This Court has also taken into consideration the fact that in paragraph 218(e) of the Minority Judgment, certain safeguards have been given for pending cases and in

Page No.# 4/4

our opinion, the petitioner would be ent